- Dear Listmembers, I have just signed on to this list. I am very interested to the answers to the recent circular from Gary Moore about specific criticisms ofMessage 1 of 2 , Sep 30, 2000View SourceDear Listmembers, I have just signed on to this list. I am very interested
to the answers to the recent circular from Gary Moore about specific
criticisms of Sartre by Heidegger, whether Sartre even knew H was a member
of the Nazi Party (it didn't bother Hannah Arendt, why not?) and Derrida's
relation to Sartre.
On this last point. May I venture an observation and invite comment. Often
I am asked what the difference between modernism and postmodernism is (in
the philosophical context). I give different answers every time. But to
myself I wonder if the difference isn't instanced as that between Les Temps
modernes and Tel Quel. In Les Temps modernes, the characteristic is to be
engaged and committed and authentic in what you say. In Tel Quel it is
proper to be writing ABOUT philosophy rather than actually being
philosophical in a committed, engaged and authentic way - or to be writing
about being committed, engaged and authentic without BEING any or either of
them. Sartre is typical of the former stance of his journal, Les Temps and
Derrida of the latter, Tel Quel. Derrida isn't really a philosopher but a
writer who theorizes ABOUT philosophy (or theorist who writes about
philosophy). Hence philosophy in the Tel Quel mode has beome theory.
- Dear email@example.com, OR: To anyone who has direct information: I know at the time of the lecture Existentialism is a Humanism and its replyMessage 2 of 2 , Oct 1, 2000View SourceDear ontologica@...,
OR: To anyone who has direct information:
I know at the time of the lecture "Existentialism is a Humanism" and
its reply "Letter on Humanism" they were going in opposite directions,
Sartre staying with the foundation of BEING AND TIME and Heidegger pursuing
"the destining of being". Heidegger obviously considered Sartre's "humanism"
naive, but even in the "Letter" Heidegger gives support to the concept of
"homo humanus" as opposed to the overextention of the concept "animal
rationale", but even that was not a rejection but simply a limitation.
Do you have specific quotations of Heidegger talking specifically about
Sartre and his philosophy?
And, while we are at it, are there any specific statements of Sartre
condemning Heidegger's Nazism? That would be very important.
Also, I know Derrida also rejected Sartre to some extent, but it is
hard to understand specifically what his objections are. As I understand it,
he totally rejects SAINT GENET as an interpretation of Jean Genet's work,
but I do not understand why except Sartre would be to him far too fixed in
his analysis of something very shifting in its meaning.
Thank you for your consideration.
Gary C. Moore
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2000 5:18 PM
Subject: [ontologica] Sartre & Heidegger
> Off the top of my head, I do know that Heidegger had a very low
> opinion of Sartre's philosophy, feeling that S had entirely
> misunderstood H's.
> Schopenhauer and Heidegger - the Occident's premier post-Kantians.